1
RTI Assessment Questions
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Instructor’s Name
Course
Date
2
RTI Assessment Questions
Q1: Options for Identifying Students with Learning Disability
One of the options for identifying struggling students is through the “IQ-Achievement
Discrepancy Model”. The model is an older version used to identify the possibility of a student
having a disability in learning and requires unique education services. It is entirely built on the
concept of a normal curve. It analyses an essential difference between a student’s scores on a
personal examination of overall intelligence and their scores from class achievement (Bradley et
al., 2002). The criteria accepted for identifying the struggling students with the “IQ-achievement
discrepancy model” is a distinction with a minimum of two-standard deviations. A learner with
a mean score of 100 is expected to obtain average scores on the achievement test. The learners
with disabilities exhibit unexpected disabilities in learning since their level of achievement is
extremely below the value predicted by the IQ scores.
Another option for obtaining students struggling with learning is known as the
“Response-to-Intervention Approach (RTI”). The essential feature of the approach is that it
expects an improvement in classroom instructions; hence ineffective classroom instructions are
eliminated from the reasons contributing to low academic performance. High-quality
instructions involve the effective processes that have been confirmed through extensive research.
The instructional procedures can be regarded as evidence-based instruction, scientifically based
practices, and research-validated instruction. In the RTI approach, the skills for the struggling
learners are monitored to identify if there is adequate responsiveness after the execution of high-
quality instructions (Bradley et al., 2002). The learners who do not adequately respond to
instructions validated by research in the general classroom are issued with increasingly validated
and intensive interventions. The progress in the skill areas is assessed frequently, and the
3
information collected is applied to inform progressive decisions concerning whether a student is
either responsive appropriately or the student still requires more intensive instruction.
Q2: Benefits of RTI Approach
The RTI technique has two major significance encompassing “early intervening” and
identifying of learning insufficiencies. The RTI approach for early intervening provides early
assistance to struggling students; hence the students can receive preventive services before they
are categorized as having disabilities or require special education services. Early intervening has
numerous benefits. It ensures that learners obtain high-quality instructions in the overall
academic classroom, encourages immediate intervention, circumvents the development of
reading difficulties, and minimizes irrelevant placements and referrals in special education for
struggling students (Fuchs, & Fuchs, 2006). On the benefit of identifying learning disabilities,
the RTI approach promotes high-quality instructions to students before referrals, uses data from
the classroom rather than from subjective observations, and delivers services immediately the
students begin to struggle.
Q3: Step in RTI Approach relevant for Compton
Standard protocol is an RTI approach that Rosa parks elementary school uses to help
struggling readers. The “standard protocol” technique requires a vigorous research foundation.
The option applies a single action validated and chosen by the school to enhance the educational
proficiencies of the struggling students. Compton is a first-grade student who has received a
“universal screening measure”, and the teacher has spotted him as a struggling learner. The
critical and the first step that the teacher should execute to assist Compton involves making an
instructional decision that observes a standard protocol (Chamberlain, 2006). Compton as a
4
struggling student is presented with a single standard intervention that is adequately validated to
address a variety of skills that Compton possesses.
Q4: The next step in The RTI Technique
When the progress for Compton is still insufficient in response to the delivery of a
standard protocol of validated intervention, Compton should be subjected to even more intensive
instruction. When the district’s or the state’s policies authorize, Compton should be subjected to
special education services depending on the progress monitoring data (Batsche et al., 2005).
Compton can also obtain a comprehensive or abbreviated evaluation for identifying a learning
disability depending on the policies for the states or districts.
5
References
Batsche, G., Elliott, J., Graden, J. L., Grimes, J., Kovaleski, J. F., Prasse, D., et al.
(2005). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation. Virginia:
National Association of State Directors of Special Education, Inc.
Bradley, R., Danielson, L., & Hallahan, D. P. (Eds.). (2002). Identification of learning
disabilities: Research to practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Chamberlain, S. P. (2006). Sharon Vaughn: The state of reading research and instruction for
struggling readers. Intervention in School and Clinic, 41(3), 169–174.
Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2006). Implementing responsiveness to intervention to identify
learning disabilities. Perspectives, 32(1), 39–43.
